The Tamworth Reading Room [ Integral]

8/13/2019 The Tamworth Reading Room [ Integral]

1/34

1. Secular Knowledge in contrast with Religion

{254} S IR , Sir Robert Peel's position in the country, and his highcharacter, render it impossible that his words and deeds should

be other than public property. This alone would furnish an apologyfor my calling the attention of your readers to the startlinglanguage, which many of them doubtless have already observed,in the Address which this most excellent and distinguished manhas lately delivered upon the establishment of a Library andReading-room at Tamworth; but he has superseded the need ofapology altogether, by proceeding to present it to the public in theform of a pamphlet. His speech, then, becomes important, bothfrom the name and the express act of its author. At the same

time, I must allow that he has not published it in the fulness inwhich it was spoken. Still it seems to me right and fair, or ratherimperative, to animadvert upon it as it has appeared in yourcolumns, since in that shape it will have the widest circulation. Apublic man must not claim to harangue the whole world innewspapers, and then to offer his second thoughts to such aschoose to buy them at a bookseller's. {255}

I shall surprise no one who has carefully read Sir Robert'sAddress, and perhaps all who have not, by stating my conviction,that, did a person take it up without looking at the heading, hewould to a certainty set it down as a production of the years 1827and 1828, the scene Gower Street, the speaker Mr. Brougham orDr. Lushington, and the occasion, the laying the first stone, or theinauguration, of the then-called London University. I professmyself quite unable to draw any satisfactory line of differencebetween the Gower Street and the Tamworth Exhibition, except,of course, that Sir Robert's personal religious feeling breaks out inhis Address across his assumed philosophy. I say assumed, Imight say affected; for I think too well of him to believe itgenuine.

On the occasion in question, Sir Robert gave expression to atheory of morals and religion, which of course, in a popularspeech, was not put out in a very dogmatic form, but which, whenanalyzed and fitted together, reads somewhat as follows: Human nature, he seems to say, if left to itself, becomes sensualand degraded. Uneducated men live in the indulgence of theirpassions; or, if they are merely taught to read, they dissipate anddebase their minds by trifling or vicious publications. Education is


2/34

the cultivation of the intellect and heart, and Useful Knowledge isthe great instrument of education. It is the parent of virtue, thenurse of religion; it exalts man to his highest perfection, and isthe sufficient scope of his most earnest exertions.

Physical and moral science rouses, transports, exalts, enlarges,tranquillizes, and satisfies the mind. Its attractiveness obtains ahold over us; the excitement attending it supersedes grosserexcitements; it makes {256} us know our duty, and therebyenables us to do it; by taking the mind off itself, it destroysanxiety; and by providing objects of admiration, it soothes andsubdues us.

And, in addition, it is a kind of neutral ground, on which men ofevery shade of politics and religion may meet together, disabuseeach other of their prejudices, form intimacies, and securecooperation.

This, it is almost needless to say, is the very theory, expressedtemperately, on which Mr. Brougham once expatiated in theGlasgow and London Universities. Sir R. Peel, indeed, has spokenwith somewhat of his characteristic moderation; but for hiscloseness in sentiment to the Brougham of other days, a fewparallels from their respective Discourses will be a sufficientvoucher.

For instance, Mr. Brougham, in his Discourses upon Science, andin his Pursuit of Knowledge under Difficulties [ Note ], wrote aboutthe "pure delight" of physical knowledge, of its "puregratification," of its "tendency to purify and elevate man'snature," of its "elevating and refining it," of its "giving a dignityand importance to the enjoyment of life." Sir Robert, pursuing theidea, shows us its importance even in death, observing, thatphysical knowledge supplied the thoughts from which "a greatexperimentalist professed in his last illness to derive somepleasure and some consolation, when most other sources ofconsolation and pleasure were closed to him."

Mr. Brougham talked much and eloquently of "the sweetness ofknowledge," and "the charms of philosophy," of students "smittenwith the love of knowledge," of {257} " wooing truth with the

unwearied ardour of a lover ," of "keen and overpowering emotion ,of ecstasy ," of "the absorbing passion of knowledge," of
http://www.newmanreader.org/Works/arguments/tamworth/section1.html#note1http://www.newmanreader.org/Works/arguments/tamworth/section1.html#note1


3/34

"the strength of the passion, and the exquisite pleasure ofits gratification ." And Sir Robert, in less glowing language, buteven in a more tender strain than Mr. Brougham, exclaims, "If Ican only persuade you to enter upon that delightful path, I am

sanguine enough to believe that there will be opened to yougradual charms and temptations which will induce you topersevere."

Mr. Brougham naturally went on to enlarge upon "bold andsuccessful adventures in the pursuit;" such, perhaps, as in thestory of Paris and Helen, or Hero and Leander; of daring ambitionin its course to greatness," [ sic ] of "enterprising spirits," and their"brilliant feats," of "adventurers of the world of intellect," and of

"the illustrious vanquishers of fortune." And Sir Robert, not to beoutdone, echoes back "aspirations for knowledge and distinction,""simple determination of overcoming difficulties," "premiums onskill and intelligence," "mental activity," "steamboats andrailroads," "producer and consumer," "spirit of inquiry afloat;" andat length he breaks out into almost conventical eloquence, crying,"Every newspaper teems with notices of publications writtenupon popular principles , detailing all the recent discoveries ofscience, and their connexion with improvements in arts andmanufactures. Let me earnestly entreat you not to neglectthe opportunity which we are now willing to afford you! It will notbe our fault if the ample page of knowledge, rich with the spoils oftime, is not unrolled to you! We tell you ," etc., etc.

Mr. Brougham pronounces that a man by "learning truths whollynew to him," and by "satisfying himself of the grounds on whichknown truths rest," "will enjoy {258} a proud consciousness ofhaving, by his own exertions, become a wiser , and therefore amore exalted creature." Sir Robert runs abreast of this greatsentiment. He tells us, in words which he adopts as his own, thata man "in becoming wiser will become better :" he will "rise atonce in the scale of intellectual and moral existence, and by beingaccustomed to such contemplations, he will feel the moraldignity of his nature exalted ."

Mr. Brougham, on his inauguration at Glasgow, spoke to theingenuous youth assembled on the occasion, of "the benefactorsof mankind, when they rest from their pious labours, lookingdown upon the blessings with which their toils and sufferings haveclothed the scene of their former existence;" and in his Discourse


4/34

upon Science declared it to be "no mean reward of our labour tobecome acquainted with the prodigious genius of those who havealmost exalted the nature of man above his destined sphere;" andwho "hold a station apart, rising over all the great teachers of

mankind, and spoken of reverently, as if Newton and La Placewere not the names of mortal men." Sir Robert cannot, of course,equal this sublime flight; but he succeeds in calling Newton andothers "those mighty spirits which have madethe greatest (though imperfect) advances towards theunderstanding of 'the Divine Nature and Power.'"

Mr. Brougham talked at Glasgow about putting to flight the "evilspirits of tyranny and persecution which haunted the long night

now gone down the sky," and about men "no longer sufferingthemselves to be led blindfold in ignorance ;" and in his Pursuit ofKnowledge he speaks of Pascal having, "under the influence ofcertain religious views, during a period of {259} depression ,conceived scientific pursuits "to be little better than abuse of histime and faculties." Sir Robert, fainter in tone, but true to thekey, warns his hearers, "Do not be deceived by the sneers thatyou hear against knowledge, which are uttered by men who wantto depress you , and keep you depressed to the level of their owncontented ignorance ."

Mr. Brougham laid down at Glasgow the infidel principle, or, as hestyles it, "the great truth," which "has gone forth to all the ends ofthe earth, that man shall no more render account to man for hisbelief, over which he has himself no control." And Dr. Lushingtonapplied it in Gower Street to the College then and there rising, byasking, "Will any one argue for establishing a monopoly to beenjoyed by the few who are of one denomination of the ChristianChurch only?" And he went on to speak of the association andunion of all without exclusion or restriction , of "friendshipscementing the bond of charity, and softening the asperitieswhich ignorance and separation have fostered." Long may it bebefore Sir Robert Peel professes the great principle itself! eventhough, as the following passages show, he is inconsistent enoughto think highly of its application in the culture of the mind. Hespeaks, for instance, of "this preliminary and fundamental rule,that no works of controversial divinity shall enter into the library(applause)," of "the institution being open to all persons of alldescriptions, without reference to political opinions, or religious


5/34

creed ," and of "an edifice in which men of all political opinionsand all religious feelings may unite in the furtherance ofknowledge, without the asperities of party feeling." Now, thatBritish society should consist of persons of different religions, is

this a positive standing evil, to be endured at best as unavoidable,{260} or a topic of exultation? Of exultation, answers Sir Robert;the greater differences the better, the more the merrier. So wemust interpret his tone.

It is reserved for few to witness the triumph of their ownopinions; much less to witness it in the instance of their owndirect and personal opponents. Whether the Lord Brougham ofthis day feels all that satisfaction and inward peace which he

attributes to success of whatever kind in intellectual efforts, it isnot for me to decide; but that he has achieved, to speak in hisown style, a mighty victory, and is leading in chains behind hischariot-wheels, a great captive, is a fact beyond question.

Such is the reward in 1841 for unpopularity in 1827.

What, however, is a boast to Lord Brougham, is in the sameproportion a slur upon the fair fame of Sir Robert Peel, at least inthe judgment of those who have hitherto thought well of him.Were there no other reason against the doctrine propounded inthe Address which has been the subject of these remarks, (but Ihope to be allowed an opportunity of assigning others,) itsparentage would be a grave prim facie difficulty in receiving it. Itis, indeed, most melancholy to see so sober and experienced aman practising the antics of one of the wildest performers of thiswild age; and taking off the tone, manner, and gestures of theversatile ex-Chancellor, with a versatility almost equal to his own.

Yet let him be assured that the task of rivalling such a man ishopeless, as well as unprofitable. No one can equal the greatsophist. Lord Brougham is inimitable in his own line.

2. Secular Knowledge not the Principle of Moral Improvement

{261} A DISTINGUISHED Conservative statesman tells us from thetown-hall of Tamworth that "in becoming wiser a man will becomebetter;" meaning by wiser more conversant with the facts and

theories of physical science; and that such a man will "rise atonce in the scale of intellectual and moral existence." "That," he


6/34

adds, "is my belief." He avows, also, that the fortunate individualwhom he is describing, by being "accustomed to suchcontemplations, will feel the moral dignity of his nature exalted ."He speaks also of physical knowledge as "being the means of

useful occupation and rational recreation;" of "the pleasures ofknowledge" superseding "the indulgence of sensual appetite," andof its "contributing to the intellectual and moral improvement ofthe community." Accordingly, he very consistently wishes it to beset before "the female as well as the male portion of thepopulation;" otherwise, as he truly observes, "great injusticewould be done to the well-educated and virtuous women" of theplace. They are to "have equal power and equal influence withothers." It will be difficult to exhaust the reflections which rise in

the mind on reading avowals of this nature.The first question which obviously suggests itself is how thesewonderful moral effects are to be wrought under theinstrumentality of the physical sciences. Can {262} the processbe analyzed and drawn out, or does it act like a dose or a charmwhich comes into general use empirically? Does Sir Robert Peelmean to say, that whatever be the occult reasons for the result,so it is; you have but to drench the popular mind with physics,and moral and religious advancement follows on the whole, inspite of individual failures? Yet where has the experiment beentried on so large a scale as to justify such anticipations? Orrather, does he mean, that, from the nature of the case, he whois imbued with science and literature, unless adverse influencesinterfere, cannot but be a better man? It is natural and becomingto seek for some clear idea of the meaning of so dark an oracle.To know is one thing, to do is another; the two things arealtogether distinct. A man knows he should get up in themorning, he lies a-bed; he knows he should not lose his temper,yet he cannot keep it. A labouring man knows he should not go tothe ale-house, and his wife knows she should not filch when shegoes out charing; but, nevertheless, in these cases, theconsciousness of a duty is not all one with the performance of it.There are, then, large families of instances, to say the least, inwhich men may become wiser, without becoming better; what,then, is the meaning of this great maxim in the mouth of itspromulgators?


7/34

Mr. Bentham would answer, that the knowledge which carriesvirtue along with it, is the knowledge how to take care of numberone a clear appreciation of what is pleasurable, what painful, andwhat promotes the one and prevents the other. An uneducated

man is ever mistaking his own interest, and standing in the wayof his own true enjoyments. Useful Knowledge is that which tendsto make us more useful to ourselves; a {263} most definite andintelligible account of the matter, and needing no explanation. Butit would be a great injustice, both to Lord Brougham and to SirRobert, to suppose, when they talk of Knowledge being Virtue,that they are Benthamizing. Bentham had not a spark of poetry inhim; on the contrary, there is much of high aspiration, generoussentiment, and impassioned feeling in the tone of Lord Brougham

and Sir Robert. They speak of knowledge as something"pulchrum," fair and glorious, exalted above the range of ordinaryhumanity, and so little connected with the personal interest of itsvotaries, that, though Sir Robert does obiter talk of improvedmodes of draining, and the chemical properties of manure, yet hemust not be supposed to come short of the lofty enthusiasm ofLord Brougham, who expressly panegyrizes certain ancientphilosophers who gave up riches, retired into solitude, orembraced a life of travel, smit with a sacred curiosity about

physical or mathematical truth.Here Mr. Bentham, did it fall to him to offer a criticism, doubtlesswould take leave to inquire whether such language was anythingbetter than a fine set of words "signifying nothing," flowers ofrhetoric, which bloom, smell sweet, and die. But it is impossible tosuspect so grave and practical a man as Sir Robert Peel of usingwords literally without any meaning at all; and though I think atbest they have not a very profound meaning, yet, such as it is, weought to attempt to draw it out.

Now, without using exact theological language, we may surelytake it for granted, from the experience of facts, that the humanmind is at best in a very unformed or disordered state; passionsand conscience, likings and reason, conflicting, might risingagainst right, with the prospect of things getting worse. Underthese circumstances, {264} what is it that the School ofphilosophy in which Sir Robert has enrolled himself proposes toaccomplish? Not a victory of the mind over itself not thesupremacy of the law not the reduction of the rebels not the


8/34

unity of our complex nature not an harmonizing of the chaos but the mere lulling of the passions to rest by turning the courseof thought; not a change of character, but a mere removal oftemptation. This should be carefully observed. When a husband is

gloomy, or an old woman peevish and fretful, those who areabout them do all they can to keep dangerous topics and causesof offence out of the way, and think themselves lucky, if, by suchskilful management, they get through the day without anoutbreak. When a child cries, the nurserymaid dances it about, orpoints to the pretty black horses out of window, or shows howashamed poll-parrot or poor puss must be of its tantarums. Suchis the sort of prescription which Sir Robert Peel offers to the goodpeople of Tamworth. He makes no pretence of subduing the giant

nature, in which we were born, of smiting the loins of thedomestic enemies of our peace, of overthrowing passion andfortifying reason; he does but offer to bribe the foe for the noncewith gifts which will avail for that purpose just so long asthey will avail, and no longer.

This was mainly the philosophy of the great Tully, except when itpleased him to speak as a disciple of the Porch. Cicero handed therecipe to Brougham, and Brougham has passed it on to Peel. Ifwe examine the old Roman's meaning in " O philosophia, vitdux ," it was neither more nor less than this; that, while we werethinking of philosophy, we were not thinking of anything else; wedid not feel grief, or anxiety, or passion, or ambition, or hatred allthat time, and the only point was to keep thinking of it. How tokeep thinking of it was {265} extra artem . If a man was in grief,he was to be amused; if disappointed, to be excited; if in a rage,to be soothed; if in love, to be roused to the pursuit of glory. Noinward change was contemplated, but a change of externalobjects; as if we were all White Ladies or Undines, our moral lifebeing one of impulse and emotion, not subjected to laws, notconsisting in habits, not capable of growth. When Cicero wasoutwitted by Csar, he solaced himself with Plato; when he losthis daughter, he wrote a treatise on Consolation. Such, too, wasthe philosophy of that Lydian city, mentioned by the historian,who in a famine played at dice to stay their stomachs.

And such is the rule of life advocated by Lord Brougham; andthough, of course, he protests that knowledge "must invigoratethe mind as well as entertain it, and refine and elevate the


9/34

character, while it gives listlessness and weariness their mostagreeable excitement and relaxation," yet his notions of vigourand elevation, when analyzed, will be found to resolve themselvesinto a mere preternatural excitement under the influence of some

stimulating object, or the peace which is attained by there beingnothing to quarrel with. He speaks of philosophers leaving thecare of their estates, or declining public honours, from the greaterdesirableness of Knowledge; envies the shelter enjoyed in theUniversity of Glasgow from the noise and bustle of the world;and, apropos of Pascal and Cowper, "so mighty," says he, "is thepower of intellectual occupation, to make the heart forget, for thetime , its most prevailing griefs, and to change its deepest gloomto sunshine."

Whether Sir Robert Peel meant all this, which others before himhave meant, it is impossible to say; but I will be bound, if he didnot mean this, he meant nothing {266} else, and his words willcertainly insinuate this meaning, wherever a reader is not contentto go without any meaning at all. They will countenance, with hishigh authority, what in one form or other is a chief error of theday, in very distinct schools of opinion, that our true excellencecomes not from within, but from without; not wrought outthrough personal struggles and sufferings, but following upon apassive exposure to influences over which we have no control.They will countenance the theory that diversion is the instrumentof improvement, and excitement the condition of right action; andwhereas diversions cease to be diversions if they are constant,and excitements by their very nature have a crisis and runthrough a course, they will tend to make novelty ever in request,and will set the great teachers of morals upon the incessantsearch after stimulants and sedatives, by which unruly naturemay, pro re nat , be kept in order.

Hence, be it observed, Lord Brougham, in the last quotedsentence, tells us, with much accuracy of statement, that"intellectual occupation made the heart" of Pascal or Cowper " forthe time forget its griefs." He frankly offers us a philosophy ofexpedients: he shows us how to live by medicine. Digestive pillshalf an hour before dinner, and a posset at bedtime at the best;and at the worst, dram-drinking and opium, the very remedyagainst broken hearts, or remorse of conscience, which is inrequest among the many, in gin-palaces not intellectual.


10/34

And if these remedies be but of temporary effect at the utmost,more commonly they will have no effect at all. Strong liquors,indeed, do for a time succeed in their object; but who was everconsoled in real trouble by the small beer of literature or science?

"Sir," said Rasselas, to the philosopher who had lost his daughter,{267} "mortality is an event by which a wise man can never besurprised." "Young man," answered the mourner, "you speak likeone that hath never felt the pangs of separation. What comfortcan truth or reason afford me? of what effect are they now but totell me that my daughter will not be restored?" Or who was evermade more humble or more benevolent by being told, as thesame practical moralist words it, "to concur with the great andunchangeable scheme of universal felicity, and cooperate with the

general dispensation and tendency of the present system ofthings"? Or who was made to do any secret act of self-denial, orwas steeled against pain, or peril, by all the lore of the infidel LaPlace, or those other "mighty spirits" which Lord Brougham andSir Robert eulogize? Or when was a choleric temperament everbrought under by a scientific King Canute planting his professor'schair before the rising waves? And as to the "keen" and "ecstatic"pleasures which Lord Brougham, not to say Sir Robert, ascribes tointellectual pursuit and conquest, I cannot help thinking that in

that line they will find themselves outbid in the market bygratifications much closer at hand, and on a level with themeanest capacity. Sir Robert makes it a boast that women are tobe members of his institution; it is hardly necessary to remind soaccomplished a classic, that Aspasia and other learned ladies inGreece are no very encouraging precedents in favour of thepurifying effects of science. But the strangest and most painfultopic which he urges, is one which Lord Brougham has had thegood taste altogether to avoid, the power, not of religion, but of

scientific knowledge, on a deathbed; a subject which Sir Roberttreats in language which it is far better to believe is mere oratorythan is said in earnest. {268}

Such is this new art of living, offered to the labouring classes, we will say, for instance, in a severe winter, snow on the ground,glass falling, bread rising, coal at 20d. the cwt., and no work.

It does not require many words, then, to determine that, takinghuman nature as it is actually found, and assuming that there isan Art of life, to say that it consists, or in any essential manner is


11/34

placed, in the cultivation of Knowledge, that the mind is changedby a discovery, or saved by a diversion, and can thus be amusedinto immortality, that grief, anger, cowardice, self-conceit, pride,or passion, can be subdued by an examination of shells or

grasses, or inhaling of gases, or chipping of rocks, or calculatingthe longitude, is the veriest of pretences which sophist ormountebank ever professed to a gaping auditory. If virtue be amastery over the mind, if its end be action, if its perfection beinward order, harmony, and peace, we must seek it in graver andholier places than in Libraries and Reading-rooms.

3. Secular Knowledge not a direct Means of Moral Improvement

{269} T HERE are two Schools of philosophy, in high esteem, at thisday, as at other times, neither of them accepting Christianprinciples as the guide of life, yet both of them unhappilypatronized by many whom it would be the worst and most crueluncharitableness to suspect of unbelief. Mr. Bentham is themaster of the one; and Sir Robert Peel is a disciple of the other.

Mr. Bentham's system has nothing ideal about it; he is a sternrealist, and he limits his realism to things which he can see, hear,taste, touch, and handle. He does not acknowledge the existenceof anything which he cannot ascertain for himself. Exist it maynevertheless, but till it makes itself felt, to him it exists not; till itcomes down right before him, and he is very short-sighted, it isnot recognized by him as having a co-existence with himself, anymore than the Emperor of China is received into the Europeanfamily of Kings. With him a being out of sight is a being simplyout of mind; nay, he does not allow the traces or glimpses of factsto have any claim on his regard, but with him to have a little andnot much, is to have nothing at all. With him to speak truth is tobe ready with a definition, and to imagine, to guess, to doubt, orto falter, is much the same as to lie. What opinion will such aniron thinker entertain of Cicero's "glory," or Lord Brougham's"truth," or Sir {270} Robert's "scientific consolations," and allthose other airy nothings which are my proper subject of remark,and which I have in view when, by way of contrast, I makemention of the philosophy of Bentham? And yet the doctrine ofthe three eminent orators, whom I have ventured to criticise, hasin it much that is far nobler than Benthamism; their misfortunebeing, not that they look for an excellence above the beaten pathof life, but that whereas Christianity has told us what that


12/34

excellence is, Cicero lived before it was given to the world, andLord Brougham and Sir Robert Peel prefer his involuntary error totheir own inherited truth. Surely, there is something unearthlyand superhuman in spite of Bentham; but it is not glory, or

knowledge, or any abstract idea of virtue, but great and goodtidings which need not here be particularly mentioned, and thepity is, that these Christian statesmen cannot be content withwhat is divine without as a supplement hankering after what washeathen.

Now, independent of all other considerations, the great difference,in a practical light, between the object of Christianity and ofheathen belief, is this that glory, science, knowledge, and

whatever other fine names we use, never healed a woundedheart, nor changed a sinful one; but the Divine Word is withpower. The ideas which Christianity brings before us are inthemselves full of influence, and they are attended with asupernatural gift over and above themselves, in order to meet thespecial exigencies of our nature. Knowledge is not "power," nor isglory "the first and only fair;" but "Grace," or the "Word," bywhichever name we call it, has been from the first a quickening,renovating, organizing principle. It has new created the individual,and transferred and knit him into a social body, composed ofmembers {271} each similarly created. It has cleansed man ofhis moral diseases, raised him to hope and energy, given him topropagate a brotherhood among his fellows, and to found a familyor rather a kingdom of saints all over the earth; it introduced anew force into the world, and the impulse which it gave continuesin its original vigour down to this day. Each one of us has lit hislamp from his neighbour, or received it from his fathers, and thelights thus transmitted are at this time as strong and as clear as if1800 years had not passed since the kindling of the sacred flame.What has glory or knowledge been able to do like this? Can itraise the dead? can it create a polity? can it do more than testifyman's need and typify God's remedy?

And yet, in spite of this, when we have an instrument given us,capable of changing the whole man, great orators and statesmenare busy, forsooth, with their heathen charms and nostrums, theirsedatives, correctives, or restoratives; as preposterously as if wewere to build our men-of-war, or conduct our iron-works, on theprinciples approved in Cicero's day. The utmost that Lord


13/34

Brougham seems to propose to himself in the education of themind, is to keep out bad thoughts by means of good a greatobject, doubtless, but not so great in philosophical conception, asis the destruction of the bad in Christian fact. "If it can be a

pleasure," he says, in his Discourse upon the Objects andAdvantages of Science, "if it can be a pleasure to gratify curiosity ,to know what we were ignorant of, to have our feelings ofwonder called forth, how pure a delight of this very kind doesnatural science hold out to its students! How wonderful are thelaws that regulate the motions of fluids! Is there anything in allthe idle books of tales and horrors, more truly astonishing {272}than the fact, that a few pounds of water may, by mere pressure,without any machinery, by merely being placed in one particular

way, produce very irresistible force? What can be more strange,than that an ounce weight should balance hundreds of pounds bythe intervention of a few bars of thin iron? Can anything surpriseus more than to find that the colour white is a mixture of allothers? that water should be chiefly composed of an inflammablesubstance? Akin to this pleasure of contemplating new andextraordinary truths is the gratification of a more learnedcuriosity , by tracing resemblances and relations between thingswhich to common apprehension seem widely different," etc., etc.

And in the same way Sir Robert tells us even ofa devout curiosity. In all cases curiosity is the means, diversion ofmind the highest end; and though of course I will not assert thatLord Brougham, and certainly not that Sir Robert Peel, denies anyhigher kind of morality, yet when the former rises aboveBenthamism, in which he often indulges, into what may becalled Broughamism proper , he commonly grasps at nothing morereal and substantial than these Ciceronian ethics.

In morals, as in physics, the stream cannot rise higher than itssource. Christianity raises men from earth, for it comes fromheaven; but human morality creeps, struts, or frets upon theearth's level, without wings to rise. The Knowledge School doesnot contemplate raising man above himself; it merely aims atdisposing of his existing powers and tastes, as is mostconvenient, or is practicable under circumstances. It finds him,like the victims of the French Tyrant, doubled up in a cage inwhich he can neither lie, stand, sit, nor kneel, and its highestdesire is to find an attitude in which his unrest may be least. Or itfinds him like some musical instrument, {273} of great power and


14/34

compass, but imperfect; from its very structure some keys mustever be out of tune, and its object, when ambition is highest, is tothrow the fault of its nature where least it will be observed. Itleaves man where it found him man, and not an Angel a sinner,

not a Saint; but it tries to make him look as much like what he isnot as ever it can. The poor indulge in low pleasures; they usebad language, swear loudly and recklessly, laugh at coarse jests,and are rude and boorish. Sir Robert would open on them a widerrange of thought and more intellectual objects, by teaching themscience; but what warrant will he give us that, if his object couldbe achieved, what they would gain in decency they would not losein natural humility and faith? If so, he has exchanged a grossfault for a more subtle one. "Temperance topics" stop drinking; let

us suppose it; but will much be gained, if those who give upspirits take to opium? Naturam expellas furc, tamen usquerecurret , is at least a heathen truth, and universities and librarieswhich recur to heathenism may reclaim it from the heathen fortheir motto.

Nay, everywhere, so far as human nature remains hardly orpartially Christianized, the heathen law remains in force; as is feltin a measure even in the most religious places and societies. Eventhere, where Christianity has power, the venom of the old Adamis not subdued. Those who have to do with our Colleges give ustheir experience, that in the case of the young committed to theircare, external discipline may change the fashionable excess, butcannot allay the principle of sinning. Stop cigars, they will take todrinking parties; stop drinking, they gamble; stop gambling, anda worse license follows. You do not get rid of vice by humanexpedients; you can but use them according to circumstances,{274} and in their place, as making the best of a bad matter. Youmust go to a higher source for renovation of the heart and of thewill. You do but play a sort of "hunt the slipper" with the fault ofour nature, till you go to Christianity.

I say, you must use human methods in their place , and there theyare useful; but they are worse than useless out of their place. Ihave no fanatical wish to deny to any whatever subject of thoughtor method of reason a place altogether, if it chooses to claim it, inthe cultivation of the mind. Mr. Bentham may despise verse-making, or Mr. Dugald Stewart logic, but the great and truemaxim is to sacrifice none to combine, and therefore to adjust,


15/34

all. All cannot be first, and therefore each has its place, and theproblem is to find it. It is at least not a lighter mistake to makewhat is secondary first, than to leave it out altogether. Here thenit is that the Knowledge Society, Gower Street College, Tamworth

Reading-room, Lord Brougham and Sir Robert Peel, are all sodeplorably mistaken. Christianity, and nothing short of it, must bemade the element and principle of all education. Where it hasbeen laid as the first stone, and acknowledged as the governingspirit, it will take up into itself, assimilate, and give a character toliterature and science. Where Revealed Truth has given the aimand direction to Knowledge, Knowledge of all kinds will minister toRevealed Truth. The evidences of Religion, natural theology,metaphysics, or, again, poetry, history, and the classics, or

physics and mathematics, may all be grafted into the mind of aChristian, and give and take by the grafting. But if in educationwe begin with nature before grace, with evidences before faith,with science before conscience, with poetry before practice, weshall be doing much the same as if we were to {275} indulge theappetites and passions, and turn a deaf ear to the reason. In eachcase we misplace what in its place is a divine gift. If we attemptto effect a moral improvement by means of poetry, we shall butmature into a mawkish, frivolous, and fastidious sentimentalism;

if by means of argument, into a dry, unamiable long-headedness; if by good society, into a polished outside, withhollowness within, in which vice has lost its grossness, andperhaps increased its malignity; if by experimental science, intoan uppish, supercilious temper, much inclined to scepticism. Butreverse the order of things: put Faith first and Knowledge second;let the University minister to the Church, and then classical poetrybecomes the type of Gospel truth, and physical science acomment on Genesis or Job, and Aristotle changes into Butler,

and Arcesilas into Berkeley [ Note ].Far from recognizing this principle, the teachers of the KnowledgeSchool would educate from Natural Theology up to Christianity,and would amend the heart through literature and philosophy.Lord Brougham, as if faith came from science, gives out that"henceforth nothing shall prevail over us to praise or to blame anyone for" his belief, "which he can no more change than he can thehue of his skin, or the height of his stature." And Sir Robert,whose profession and life give the lie to his philosophy, founds alibrary into which "no works of controversial divinity shall enter,"


16/34

that is, no Christian doctrine at all; and he tells us that "anincreased sagacity will make men not merely believe in the colddoctrines of Natural Religion, but that it will so prepare {276} andtemper the spirit and understanding that they will be

better qualified to comprehend the great scheme of humanredemption ." And again, Lord Brougham considers that "thepleasures of science tend not only to make our lives moreagreeable, but better;" and Sir Robert responds, that "heentertains the hope that there will be the means afforded ofuseful occupation and rational recreation; that men will prefer thepleasures of knowledge above the indulgence of sensual appetite,and that there is a prospect of contributing to the intellectual andmoral improvement of the neighbourhood."

Can the nineteenth century produce no more robust and creativephilosophy than this?

4. Secular Knowledge not the Antecedent of Moral Improvement

{277} H UMAN nature wants recasting, but Lord Brougham is all fortinkering it. He does not despair of making something of it yet. Heis not, indeed, of those who think that reason, passion, andwhatever else is in us, are made right and tight by the principle ofself-interest. He understands that something more is necessaryfor man's happiness than self-love; he feels that man hasaffections and aspirations which Bentham does not take accountof, and he looks about for their legitimate objects. Christianity hasprovided these; but, unhappily, he passes them by. He libelsthem with the name of dogmatism, and conjures up instead thephantoms of Glory and Knowledge; idola theatri , as his famouspredecessor calls them. "There are idols," says Lord Bacon,"which have got into the human mind, from the different tenets ofphilosophers, and the perverted laws of demonstration. And thesewe denominate idols of the theatre; because all the philosophiesthat have been hitherto invented or received, are but so manystage plays, written or acted, as having shown nothing butfictitious and theatrical worlds. Idols of the theatre, or theories,are many, and will probably grow much more numerous; for ifmen had not, through many ages, been prepossessed withreligion and theology , {278} and if civil governments , butparticularly monarchies," (and, I suppose, their ministers,counsellors, functionaries, inclusive,) " had not been averse toinnovations of this kind , though but intended, so as to make it


17/34

dangerous and prejudicial to the private fortunes of such as takethe bent of innovating, not only by depriving them of advantages,but also of exposing them to contempt and hatred, there woulddoubtless have been numerous other sects of philosophies and

theories, introduced, of kin to those that in great variety formerlyflourished among the Greeks. And these theatrical fables havethis in common with dramatic pieces, that the fictitious narrativeis neater, more elegant and pleasing, than the true history."

I suppose we may readily grant that the science of the day isattended by more lively interest, and issues in more entertainingknowledge, than the study of the New Testament. Accordingly,Lord Brougham fixes upon such science as the great desideratum

of human nature, and puts aside faith under the nickname ofopinion. I wish Sir Robert Peel had not fallen into the snare,insulting doctrine by giving it the name of "controversial divinity."

However, it will be said that Sir Robert, in spite of such forms ofspeech, differs essentially from Lord Brougham: for he goes on, inthe latter part of the Address which has occasioned theseremarks, to speak of Science as leading to Christianity. "I cannever think it possible," he says, "that a mind can be soconstituted, that after being familiarized with the great truth ofobserving in every object of contemplation that nature presentsthe manifest proofs of a Divine Intelligence, if you range evenfrom the organization of the meanest weed you trample upon, orof the insect that {279} lives but for an hour, up to themagnificent structure of the heavens, and the still more wonderfulphenomena of the soul, reason, and conscience of man; I cannotbelieve that any man, accustomed to such contemplations, canreturn from them with any other feelings than those of enlargedconceptions of the Divine Power, and greater reverence for thename of the Almighty Creator of the universe." A long andcomplicated sentence, and no unfitting emblem of thedemonstration it promises. It sets before us a process anddeduction. Depend on it, it is not so safe a road and soexpeditious a journey from premiss and conclusion as Sir Robertanticipates. The way is long, and there are not a few half-wayhouses and traveller's rests along it; and who is to warrant thatthe members of the Reading-room and Library will go steadily onto the goal he would set before them? And when at length theycome to "Christianity," pray how do the roads lay between it and


18/34

"controversial divinity"? Or, grant the Tamworth readersto begin with "Christianity" as well as science, the same questionsuggests itself, What is Christianity? Universal benevolence?Exalted morality? Supremacy of law? Conservatism? An age of

light? An age of reason? Which of them all?Most cheerfully do I render to so religious a man as Sir RobertPeel the justice of disclaiming any insinuation on my part, that hehas any intention at all to put aside Religion; yet his words eithermean nothing, or they do, both on their surface, and when carriedinto effect, mean something very irreligious.

And now for one plain proof of this.

It is certain, then, that the multitude of men have neither timenor capacity for attending to many subjects. If they attend to one,they will not attend to the other; {280} if they give their leisureand curiosity to this world, they will have none left for the next.We cannot be everything; as the poet says, " non omnia possumusomnes ." We must make up our minds to be ignorant of much, ifwe would know anything. And we must make our choice betweenrisking Science, and risking Religion. Sir Robert indeed says, "Donot believe that you have not time for rational recreation. It is theidle man who wants time for everything." However, this seems tome rhetoric; and what I have said to be the matter of fact, for thetruth of which I appeal, not to argument, but to the proper judgesof facts, common sense and practical experience; and if theypronounce it to be a fact, then Sir Robert Peel, little as he meansit, does unite with Lord Brougham in taking from Christianity whathe gives to Science.

I will make this fair offer to both of them. Every member of the

Church Established shall be eligible to the Tamworth Library onone condition that he brings from the "public minister ofreligion," to use Sir Robert's phrase, a ticket in witness of hisproficiency in Christian knowledge. We will have no "controversialdivinity" in the Library, but a little out of it. If the gentlemen ofthe Knowledge School will but agree to teach town and countryReligion first, they shall have a carte blanche from me to teachanything or everything else second. Not a word has been utteredor intended in these Letters against Science; I would treat it, as

they do not treat "controversial divinity," with respect andgratitude. They caricature doctrine under the name of


19/34

controversy. I do not nickname science infidelity. I call it by theirown name, "useful and entertaining knowledge;" and I calldoctrine "Christian knowledge:" and, as thinking Christianitysomething {281} more than useful and entertaining, I want faith

to come first, and utility and amusement to follow.

That persons indeed are found in all classes, high and low, busyand idle, capable of proceeding from sacred to profaneknowledge, is undeniable; and it is desirable they should do so. Itis desirable that talent for particular departments in literature andscience should be fostered and turned to account, wherever it isfound. But what has this to do with this general canvass of"all persons of all descriptions without reference to religious

creed, who shall have attained the age of fourteen "? Why solicit"the working classes, without distinction of party, political opinion,or religious profession;" that is, whether they have heard of a Godor no? Whence these cries rising on our ears, of "Let me entreatyou!" "Neglect not the opportunity!" "It will not be our fault!""Here is an access for you!" very like the tones of a streetpreacher, or the cad of an omnibus, little worthy of a greatstatesman and a religious philosopher?

However, the Tamworth Reading-room admits of one restriction,which is not a little curious, and has no very liberal sound. Itseems that all " virtuous women" may be members of the Library;that "great injustice would be done to the well-educated andvirtuous women of the town and neighbourhood" had they beenexcluded. A very emphatic silence is maintained about women notvirtuous. What does this mean? Does it mean to exclude them,while bad men are admitted? Is this accident, or design, sinisterand insidious, against a portion of the community? What hasvirtue to do with a Reading-room? It is to make its membersvirtuous; it is to "exalt the moral dignity of their nature;" it is toprovide "charms and temptations" to allure them {282} fromsensuality and riot. To whom but to the vicious ought Sir Robertto discourse about "opportunities," and "access," and "moralimprovement;" and who else would prove a fitter experiment, anda more glorious triumph, of scientific influences? And yet he shutsout all but the well-educated and virtuous.

Alas, that bigotry should have left the mark of its hoof on thegreat "fundamental principle of the Tamworth Institution"! SirRobert Peel is bound in consistency to attempt its obliteration. But


20/34

if that is impossible, as many will anticipate, why, O why, while heis about it, why will he not give us just a little more ofit? Cannot we prevail on him to modify his principle, and to admitinto his library none but "well-educated and virtuous" men ?

5. Secular Knowledge not a Principle of Social Unity

{283} S IR R OBERT P EEL proposes to establish a Library which "shallbe open to all persons of all descriptions, without reference topolitical opinions or to religious creed." He invites those who areconcerned in manufactories, or who have many workmen,"without distinction of party, political opinions, or religiousprofession." He promises that "in the selection of subjects forpublic lectures everything calculated to excite religious or politicalanimosity shall be excluded." Nor is any "discussion on mattersconnected with religion, politics, or local party differences" to bepermitted in the reading-room. And he congratulates himself thathe has [ sic ] "laid the foundation of an edifice in which men of allpolitical opinions and of all religious feelings may unite infurtherance of Knowledge, without the asperities of "partyfeeling." In these statements religious difference are madesynonymous with "party feeling;" and, whereas the tree is "knownby its fruit," their characteristic symptoms are felicitouslydescribed as "asperities," and "animosities." And, in order toteach us more precisely what these differences are worth, theyare compared to differences between Whig and Tory nay, evento " local party differences;" such, I suppose, as about a municipalelection, or a hole-and-corner meeting, or a parish job, or a bill inParliament for a railway.

But, to give him the advantage of the more honourable {284}parallel of the two, are religious principles to be put upon a leveleven with political? Is it as bad to be a republican as anunbeliever? Is it as magnanimous to humour a scoffer as to sparean opponent in the House? Is a difference about the Reform Billall one with a difference about the Creed? Is it as polluting to heararguments for Lord Melbourne as to hear a scoff against theApostles? To a statesman, indeed, like Sir Robert, to abandonone's party is a far greater sacrifice than to unparliamentary men;and it would be uncandid to doubt that he is rather magnifyingpolitics than degrading Religion in throwing them together; butstill, when he advocates concessions in theology and politics, hemust be plainly told to make presents of things that belong to


21/34

him, nor seek to be generous with other people's substance.There are entails in more matters than parks and old places. Hemade his politics for himself, but Another made theology.

Christianity is faith, faith implies a doctrine; a doctrinepropositions; propositions yes or no, yes or no differences.Differences, then, are the natural attendants on Christianity, andyou cannot have Christianity, and not have differences. When,then, Sir Robert Peel calls such differences points of "partyfeeling," what is this but to insult Christianity? Yet so cautious, socorrect a man, cannot have made such a sacrifice for nothing; nordoes he long leave us in doubt what is his inducement. He tells usthat his great aim is the peace and good order of the community,

and the easy working of the national machine. With this in view,any price is cheap, everything is marketable; all impediments area nuisance. He does not undo for undoing's sake; he gains morethan an equivalent. It is a mistake, too, to say that he considersall differences of opinion as equal in importance; {285} no, theyare only equally in the way. He only compares them togetherwhere they are comparable, in their common inconvenience to aminister of State. They may be as little homogeneous as chalk isto cheese, or Macedon to Monmouth, but they agree in interferingwith social harmony; and, since that harmony is the first of goodsand the end of life, what is left us but to discard all that disunitesus, and to cultivate all that may amalgamate?

Could Sir Robert have set a more remarkable example of self-sacrifice than in thus becoming the disciple of his political foe,accepting from Lord Brougham his new principle of combination,rejecting Faith for the fulcrum of Society, and proceeding to rest itupon Knowledge?

"I cannot help thinking," he exclaims at Tamworth, "that bybringing together in an institution of this kind intelligent men of allclasses and conditions of life, by uniting together, in thecommittee of this institution, the gentleman of ancient family andgreat landed possessions with the skilful mechanic and artificer ofgood character, I cannot help believing that weare harmonizing the gradations of society, and binding mentogether by a new bond, which will have more thanordinary strength on account of the object which unites us." Theold bond, he seems to say, was Religion; Lord Brougham's isKnowledge. Faith, once the soul of social union, is now but the


22/34

spirit of division. Not a single doctrine but is "controversialdivinity;" not an abstraction can be imagined (could abstractionsconstrain), not a comprehension projected (could comprehensionsconnect), but will leave out one or other portion or element of the

social fabric. We must abandon Religion, if we aspire to bestatesmen. Once, indeed, it was a living power, kindling hearts,leavening them with one idea, moulding them on {286} onemodel, developing them into one polity. Ere now it has been thelife of morality: it has given birth to heroes; it has wieldedempire. But another age has come in, and Faith is effete; let ussubmit to what we cannot change; let us not hang over our dead,but bury it out of sight. Seek we out some young and vigorousprinciple, rich in sap, and fierce in life, to give form to elements

which are fast resolving into their inorganic chaos; and whereshall we find such a principle but in Knowledge?

Accordingly, though Sir Robert somewhat chivalrously battles forthe appointment upon the Book Committee of what he calls two"public ministers of religion, holding prominent and responsibleoffices, endowed by the State," and that ex officio , yet he isuntrue to his new principle only in appearance: for he couples hisconcession with explanations, restrictions, and safeguards quitesufficient to prevent old Faith becoming insurgent against youngKnowledge. First he takes his Vicar and Curate as "conversantwith literary subjects and with literary works," and then as havingduties "immediately connected with the moral condition andimprovement" of the place. Further he admits "it is perfectly rightto be jealous of all power held by such a tenure:" and he insistson the "fundamental" condition that these sacred functionariesshall permit no doctrinal works to be introduced or lectures to bedelivered. Lastly, he reserves in the general body the power ofwithdrawing this indulgence "if the existing checks be notsufficient, and the power be abused ," abused, that is, by thevicar and curate; also he desires to secure Knowledge frombeing perverted to " evil or immoral purposes" such perversion ofcourse, if attempted, being the natural {287} antithesis,or pendant , to the vicar's contraband introduction of the doctrinesof Faith.

Lord Brougham will make all this clearer to us. A work of highinterest and varied information, to which I have already referred,is attributed to him, and at least is of his school, in which the


23/34

ingenious author, whoever he is, shows how Knowledge can dofor Society what has hitherto been supposed the prerogative ofFaith. As to Faith and its preachers, he had already complimentedthem at Glasgow, as "the evil spirits of tyranny and persecution,"

and had bid them good morning as the scared and dazzledcreatures of the "long night now gone down the sky."

"The great truth," he proclaimed in language borrowed from therecords of faith (for after parsons no men quote Scripture morefamiliarly than Liberals and Whigs), has finally gone forth to allthe ends of the earth , that man shall no more render account toman for his belief, over which he has himself no control.Henceforth nothing shall prevail on us to praise or to blame any

one for that which he can no more change than he can the hue ofhis skin or the height of his stature." And then he or his scholarproceeds to his new Vit Sanctorum , or, as he calls it,"Illustrations of the Pursuit of Knowledge;" and, whereas thebadge of Christian saintliness is conflict, he writes of the "Pursuitof Knowledge under difficulties ;" and, whereas this Knowledge isto stand in the place of Religion, he assumes a hortatory tone, aspecies of eloquence in which decidedly he has no rival but SirRobert. "Knowledge," he says, "is happiness, as well as power andvirtue;" and he demands "the dedication of our faculties" to it."The struggle ," he gravely observes, which its disciple "has towage may be a {288} protracted, but it ought not to bea cheerless one: for, if he do not relax his exertions , everymovement he makes is necessarily a step forward , if not towardsthat distinction which intellectual attainments sometimes confer,at least to that inward satisfaction and enjoyment which is alwaystheir reward. No one stands in the way of another, or can deprivehim of any part of his chance, we should rather say of hiscertainty, of success; on the contrary, they are all fellow-workers ,and may materially help each other forward." And he enumeratesin various places the virtues which adorn the children ofKnowledge ardour united to humility, childlike alacrity,teachableness, truthfulness, patience, concentration of attention,husbandry of time, self-denial, self-command, and heroism.

Faith, viewed in its history through past ages, presents us withthe fulfilment of one great idea in particular that, namely, of anaristocracy of exalted spirits, drawn together out of all countries,ranks, and ages, raised above the condition of humanity,


24/34

specimens of the capabilities of our race, incentives to rivalry andpatterns for imitation. This Christian idea Lord Brougham hasborrowed for his new Pantheon, which is equally various in allattributes and appendages of mind, with this one characteristic in

all its specimens, the pursuit of Knowledge. Some of his worthiesare low born, others of high degree; some are in Europe, othersin the Antipodes; some in the dark ages, others in the ages oflight; some exercise a voluntary, others an involuntary toil; somegive up riches, and others gain them; some are fixtures, andothers adventure much; some are profligate, and others ascetic;and some are believers, and others are infidels.

Alfred, severely good and Christian, takes his place in {289} this

new hagiology beside the gay and graceful Lorenzo de Medicis;for did not the one "import civilization into England," and was notthe other "the wealthy and munificent patron of all the liberalarts"? Edward VI. and Haroun al Raschid, Dr. Johnson and Dr.Franklin, Newton and Protagoras, Pascal and Julian the Apostate,Joseph Milner and Lord Byron, Cromwell and Ovid, Bayle andBoyle, Adrian pope and Adrian emperor, Lady Jane Grey andMadame Roland, human beings who agreed in nothing but intheir humanity and in their love of Knowledge, are all admitted bythis writer to one beatification, in proof of the Catholic characterof his substitute for Faith.

The persecuting Marcus is a "good and enlightened emperor," anda "delightful" spectacle, when "mixing in the religious processionsand ceremonies" of Athens, "re-building and re-endowing theschools," whence St. Paul was driven in derision. The royalAlphery, on the contrary, "preferred his humble parsonage" to thethrone of the Czars. West was "nurtured among the quiet andgentle affections of a Quaker family." Kirke White's "feelingsbecame ardently devotional, and he determined to give up his lifeto the preaching of Christianity." Roger Bacon was "a brother ofthe Franciscan Order, at that time the great support andornament of both Universities." Belzoni seized "the opportunity" ofBonaparte's arrival in Italy to "throw off his monastic habit," "itsidleness and obscurity," and to engage himself as a performer atAstley's. Duval, "a very able antiquarian of the last century,"began his studies as a peasant boy, and finished them in aJesuits' College. Mr. Davy, "having written a system of divinity,"effected the printing of it in thirteen years "with a press of his


25/34

own construction," and the assistance of his female servant,{290} working off page by page for twenty-six volumes 8vo, ofnearly 500 pages each. Raleigh, in spite of "immoderateambition," was "one of the very chief glories of an age crowded

with towering spirits."

Nothing comes amiss to this author; saints and sinners, theprecious and the vile, are torn from their proper homes andrecklessly thrown together under the category of Knowledge. 'Tisa pity he did not extend his view, as Christianity has done, tobeings out of sight of man. Milton could have helped him to someangelic personages, as patrons and guardians of his intellectualtemple, who of old time, before faith had birth,

"Apart sat on a hill retiredIn thoughts more elevate, and reasoned highOf providence, foreknowledge, will, and fate,Passion and apathy, and glory, and shame, Vain wisdom all, and false philosophy."

And, indeed, he does make some guesses that way, speakingmost catholically of being "admitted to a fellowship with thoseloftier minds" who "by universal consent held a station apart ," andare "spoken of reverently ," as if their names were not those "of

mortal men;" and he speaks of these "benefactors of mankind,when they rest from their pious labours, looking down" upon theblessings with which their " toils and sufferings have clothed thescene of their former existence."

Such is the oratory which has fascinated Sir Robert; yet we mustrecollect that in the year 1832, even the venerable Society forPromoting Christian Knowledge herself, catching its sound, andhearing something about sublimity, and universality, and

brotherhood, and effort, and felicity, was beguiled into anadmission of this singularly irreligious work into the list ofpublications {291} which she had delegated to a Committee toselect in usum laicorum .

That a Venerable Society should be caught by the vision of aChurch Catholic is not wonderful; but what could possessphilosophers and statesmen to dazzle her with it, but man's needof some such support, and the divine excellence and sovereignvirtue of that which Faith once created?


26/34

6. Secular Knowledge not a Principle of Action

{292} P EOPLE say to me, that it is but a dream to suppose thatChristianity should regain the organic power in human society which onceit possessed. I cannot help that; I never said it could. I am not apolitician; I am proposing no measures, but exposing a fallacy, andresisting a pretence. Let Benthamism reign, if men have no aspirations;but do not tell them to be romantic, and then solace them with glory; donot attempt by philosophy what once was done by religion. Theascendancy of Faith may be impracticable, but the reign of Knowledge isincomprehensible. The problem for statesmen of this age is how toeducate the masses, and literature and science cannot give the solution.

Not so deems Sir Robert Peel; his firm belief and hope is, "that anincreased sagacity will administer to an exalted faith; that it will make

men not merely believe in the cold doctrines of Natural Religion, but thatit will so prepare and temper the spirit and understanding, that they willbe better qualified to comprehend the great scheme of humanredemption." He certainly thinks that scientific pursuits have someconsiderable power of impressing religion upon the mind of the multitude.I think not, and will now say why.

Science gives us the grounds or premisses from which religious truths areto be inferred; but it does not set about inferring them, much less does itreach the inference; that {293} is not its province. It brings before us

phenomena, and it leaves us, if we will, to call them works of design,wisdom, or benevolence; and further still, if we will, to proceed to confessan Intelligent Creator. We have to take its facts, and to give them ameaning, and to draw our own conclusions from them. First comesKnowledge, then a view, then reasoning, and then belief. This is whyScience has so little of a religious tendency; deductions have no power ofpersuasion. The heart is commonly reached, not through the reason, butthrough the imagination, by means of direct impressions, by thetestimony of facts and events, by history, by description. Personsinfluence us, voices melt us, looks subdue us, deeds inflame us. Many a

man will live and die upon a dogma: no man will be a martyr for aconclusion. A conclusion is but an opinion; it is not a thing which is , butwhich we are " certain about ;" and it has often been observed, that wenever say we are certain without implying that we doubt. To say that athing must be, is to admit that it may not be. No one, I say, will die for hisown calculations; he dies for realities. This is why a literary religion is solittle to be depended upon; it looks well in fair weather, but its doctrinesare opinions, and, when called to suffer for them, it slips them between itsfolios, or burns them at its hearth. And this again is the secret of thedistrust and raillery with which moralists have been so commonly visited.They say and do not. Why? Because they are contemplating the fitness ofthings, and they live by the square, when they should be realizing theirhigh maxims in the concrete. Now Sir Robert thinks better of natural


27/34

history, chemistry, and astronomy, than of such ethics; but they too, whatare they more than divinity in posse ? He protests against "controversialdivinity:" is inferential much better? {294}

I have no confidence, then, in philosophers who cannot help beingreligious, and are Christians by implication. They sit at home, and reachforward to distances which astonish us; but they hit without grasping, andare sometimes as confident about shadows as about realities. They haveworked out by a calculation the lie of a country which they never saw, andmapped it by means of a gazetteer; and like blind men, though they canput a stranger on his way, they cannot walk straight themselves, and donot feel it quite their business to walk at all.

Logic makes but a sorry rhetoric with the multitude; first shoot roundcorners, and you may not despair of converting by a syllogism. Tell men

to gain notions of a Creator from His works, and, if they were to set aboutit (which nobody does), they would be jaded and wearied by the labyrinththey were tracing. Their minds would be gorged and surfeited by thelogical operation. Logicians are more set upon concluding rightly, than onright conclusions. They cannot see the end for the process. Few men havethat power of mind which may hold fast and firmly a variety of thoughts.We ridicule "men of one idea;" but a great many of us are born to besuch, and we should be happier if we knew it. To most men argumentmakes the point in hand only more doubtful, and considerably lessimpressive. After all, man is not a reasoning animal; he is a seeing,

feeling, contemplating, acting animal. He is influenced by what is directand precise. It is very well to freshen our impressions and convictionsfrom physics, but to create them we must go elsewhere. Sir Robert Peel"never can think it possible that a mind can be so constituted, that, afterbeing familiarized with the wonderful discoveries which have been made inevery part of experimental science, it can {295} retire from suchcontemplations without more enlarged conceptions of God's providence,and a higher reverence for His name." If he speaks of religious minds, heperpetrates a truism; if of irreligious, he insinuates a paradox.

Life is not long enough for a religion of inferences; we shall never havedone beginning, if we determine to begin with proof. We shall ever belaying our foundations; we shall turn theology into evidences, and divinesinto textuaries. We shall never get at our first principles. Resolve tobelieve nothing, and you must prove your proofs and analyze yourelements, sinking further and further, and finding "in the lowest depth alower deep," till you come to the broad bosom of scepticism. I wouldrather be bound to defend the reasonableness of assuming thatChristianity is true, than to demonstrate a moral governance from thephysical world. Life is for action. If we insist on proofs for everything, weshall never come to action: to act you must assume, and that assumptionis faith.


28/34

Let no one suppose that in saying this I am maintaining that all proofs areequally difficult, and all propositions equally debatable. Some assumptionsare greater than others, and some doctrines involve postulates larger thanothers, and more numerous. I only say that impressions lead to action,and that reasonings lead from it. Knowledge of premisses, and inferencesupon them, this is not to live . It is very well as a matter of liberalcuriosity and of philosophy to analyze our modes of thought; but let thiscome second, and when there is leisure for it, and then our examinationswill in many ways even be subservient to action. But if we commence withscientific knowledge and argumentative proof, or lay any great stressupon it as the basis of personal {296} Christianity, or attempt to makeman moral and religious by Libraries and Museums, let us in consistencytake chemists for our cooks, and mineralogists for our masons.

Now I wish to state all this as matter of fact, to be judged by the candid

testimony of any persons whatever. Why we are so constituted that Faith,not Knowledge or Argument, is our principle of action, is a question withwhich I have nothing to do; but I think it is a fact, and if it be such, wemust resign ourselves to it as best we may, unless we take refuge in theintolerable paradox, that the mass of men are created for nothing, and aremeant to leave life as they entered it. So well has this practically beenunderstood in all ages of the world, that no Religion has yet been aReligion of physics or of philosophy. It has ever been synonymous withRevelation. It never has been a deduction from what we know: it has everbeen an assertion of what we are to believe. It has never lived in a

conclusion; it has ever been a message, or a history, or a vision. Nolegislator or priest ever dreamed of educating our moral nature by scienceor by argument. There is no difference here between true Religions andpretended. Moses was instructed, not to reason from the creation, but towork miracles. Christianity is a history supernatural, and almost scenic: ittells us what its Author is, by telling us what He has done. I have no wishat all to speak otherwise than respectfully of conscientious Dissenters, butI have heard it said by those who were not their enemies, and who hadknown much of their preaching, that they had often heard narrow-mindedand bigoted clergymen, and often Dissenting ministers of a far more

intellectual cast; but that Dissenting teaching came to nothing,

that itwas dissipated in thoughts which had no point, and inquiries whichconverged to no centre, that it ended as {297} it began, and sent awayits hearers as it found them; whereas the instruction in the Church, withall its defects and mistakes, comes to some end, for it started from somebeginning. Such is the difference between the dogmatism of faith and thespeculations of logic.

Lord Brougham himself, as we have already seen, has recognized theforce of this principle. He has not left his philosophical religion to

argument; he has committed it to the keeping of the imagination. Whyshould he depict a great republic of letters, and an intellectual Pantheon,


29/34

but that he feels that instances and patterns, not logical reasonings, arethe living conclusions which alone have a hold over the affections, or canform the character?

7. Secular Knowledge without Personal Religion tends to Unbelief {298} W HEN Sir Robert Peel assures us from the Town-hall atTamworth that physical science must lead to religion, it is no badcompliment to him to say that he is unreal. He speaks of what heknows nothing about. To a religious man like him, Science hasever suggested religious thoughts; he colours the phenomena ofphysics with the hues of his own mind, and mistakes aninterpretation for a deduction. "I am sanguine enough to believe,"he says, "that that superior sagacity which is most conversantwith the course and constitution of Nature will be first to turn adeaf ear to objections and presumptions against RevealedReligion, and to acknowledge the complete harmony of theChristian Dispensation with all that Reason, assisted byRevelation, tells us of the course and constitution of Nature."Now, considering that we are all of us educated as Christians frominfancy, it is not easy to decide at this day whether Sciencecreates Faith, or only confirms it; but we have this remarkablefact in the history of heathen Greece against the formersupposition, that her most eminent empirical philosophers wereatheists, and that it was their atheism which was the cause oftheir eminence. "The natural philosophies of Democritus andothers," says Lord Bacon, " who allow no God or mind in the frameof things, but attribute the structure of the universe to {299}infinite essays and trials of nature, or what they call fate orfortune, and assigned the causes of particular things to thenecessity of matter, without any intermixture of final causes ,seem, as far as we can judge from the remains of theirphilosophy, much more solid , and to have gone deeper intonature , with regard to physical causes, than the philosophies ofAristotle or Plato: and this only because they never meddled withfinal causes , which the others were perpetually inculcating."

Lord Bacon gives us both the fact and the reason for it. Physicalphilosophers are ever inquiring whence things are, not why ;referring them to nature, not to mind; and thus they tend tomake a system a substitute for a God. Each pursuit or calling hasits own dangers, and each numbers among its professors menwho rise superior to them. As the soldier is tempted to


30/34

dissipation, and the merchant to acquisitiveness, and the lawyerto the sophistical, and the statesman to the expedient, and thecountry clergyman to ease and comfort, yet there are goodclergymen, statesmen, lawyers, merchants, and soldiers,

notwithstanding; so there are religious experimentalists, thoughphysics, taken by themselves, tend to infidelity; but to haverecourse to physics to make men religious is like recommending acanonry as a cure for the gout, or giving a youngster acommission as a penance for irregularities.

The whole framework of Nature is confessedly a tissue ofantecedents and consequents; we may refer all things forwards todesign, or backwards on a physical cause. La Place is said to have

considered he had a formula which solved all the motions of thesolar system; shall we say that those motions came from thisformula or from a Divine Fiat? Shall we have recourse for ourtheory to physics or to theology? Shall we assume {300} Matterand its necessary properties to be eternal, or Mind with its divineattributes? Does the sun shine to warm the earth, or is the earthwarmed because the sun shines? The one hypothesis will solvethe phenomena as well as the other. Say not it is but a puzzle inargument, and that no one ever felt it in fact. So far from it, Ibelieve that the study of Nature, when religious feeling is away,leads the mind, rightly or wrongly, to acquiesce in the atheistictheory, as the simplest and easiest. It is but parallel to thattendency in anatomical studies, which no one will deny, to solveall the phenomena of the human frame into material elementsand powers, and to dispense with the soul. To those who areconscious of matter, but not conscious of mind, it seems morerational to refer all things to one origin, such as they know, thanto assume the existence of a second origin such as they know not.It is Religion, then, which suggests to Science its trueconclusions; the facts come from Knowledge, but the principlescome of Faith [ Note 1 ].

There are two ways, then, of reading Nature as a machine andas a work. If we come to it with the assumption that it is acreation, we shall study it with awe; if assuming it to be a system,with mere curiosity. Sir Robert does not make this distinction. Hesubscribes to the belief that the man "accustomed to suchcontemplations, struck with awe by the manifold proofs of infinitepower and infinite wisdom, will yield more ready and hearty


31/34

assent yes, the assent of the heart, and not only of theunderstanding, to the pious exclamation, {301} 'O Lord, howglorious are Thy works!'" He considers that greater insight intoNature will lead a man to say, "How great and wise is the Creator,

who has done this!" True: but it is possible that his thoughts maytake the form of "How clever is the creature who has discoveredit!" and self-conceit may stand proxy for adoration. This is no idleapprehension. Sir Robert himself, religious as he is, gives causefor it; for the first reflection that rises in his mind, as expressed inthe above passage, before his notice of Divine Power andWisdom, is, that "the man accustomed to such contemplations willfeel the moral dignity of his nature exalted ." But Lord Broughamspeaks out. "The delight," he says, "is inexpressible of being able

to follow , as it were, with our eyes, the marvellous works of theGreat Architect of Nature." And more clearly still: "One of themost gratifying treats which science affords us is the knowledgeof the extraordinary powers with which the human mind isendowed. No man, until he has studied philosophy, can have a

just idea of the great things for which Providence has fitted hisunderstanding, the extraordinary disproportion which there isbetween his natural strength and the powers of his mind, and theforce which he derives from these powers. When we survey the

marvellous truths of astronomy, we are first of all lost in thefeeling of immense space, and of the comparative insignificance ofthis globe and its inhabitants. But there soon arises a sense ofgratification and of new wonder at perceiving how so insignificanta creature has been able to reach such a knowledge of theunbounded system of the universe." So, this is the religion we areto gain from the study of Nature; how miserable! The god weattain is our own mind; our veneration is even professedly theworship of self. {302}

The truth is that the system of Nature is just as much connectedwith Religion, where minds are not religious, as a watch or asteam-carriage. The material world, indeed, is infinitely morewonderful than any human contrivance; but wonder is notreligion, or we should be worshipping our railroads. What thephysical creation presents to us in itself is a piece of machinery,and when men speak of a Divine Intelligence as its Author, thisgod of theirs is not the Living and True, unless the spring is thegod of a watch, or steam the creator of the engine. Their idol,taken at advantage (though it is not an idol, for they do not


32/34

worship it), is the animating principle of a vast and complicatedsystem; it is subjected to laws, and it is connatural and co-extensive with matter. Well does Lord Brougham call it "the greatarchitect of nature;" it is an instinct, or a soul of the world, or a

vital power; it is not the Almighty God [ Note 2 ].

It is observable that Lord Brougham does not allude toany relation as existing between his god and ourselves. He is filledwith awe, it seems, at the powers of the human mind, asdisplayed in their analysis of the vast creation. Is not this a fittingtime to say a word about gratitude towards Him who gave them?Not a syllable. What we gain from his contemplation of Nature is"a gratifying treat," the knowledge of the "great things for which

Providence has fitted man's understanding;" our admirationterminates in man; it passes on to no prototype [ Note 3 ]. I amnot quarrelling with his result as illogical or unfair; it is butconsistent with the principles with which he started. Take thesystem of Nature by itself, detached from the axioms of Religion,and I am willing to confess nay, I have been expressly urging that it {303} does not force us to take it for more than a system;but why, then, persist in calling the study of it religious, when itcan be treated, and is treated, thus atheistically? Say thatReligion hallows the study, and not that the study createsReligion. The essence of Religion is the idea of a Moral Governorand a particular Providence; now let me ask, is the doctrine ofmoral governance and a particular providence conveyed to usthrough the physical sciences at all? Would they be physicalsciences if they treated of morals? Can physics teach moralmatters without ceasing to be physics? But are not virtue andvice, and responsibility, and reward and punishment, anythingelse than moral matters, and are they not of the essence ofReligion? In what department, then, of physics are they to befound? Can the problems and principles they involve be expressedin the differential calculus? Is the galvanic battery a whit moreakin to conscience and will, than the mechanical powers? What weseek is what concerns us, the traces of a Moral Governor; evenreligious minds cannot discern these in the physical sciences;astronomy witnesses divine power, and physics divine skill; andall of them divine beneficence; but which teaches of divineholiness, truth, justice, or mercy? Is that much of a Religionwhich is silent about duty, sin, and its remedies? Was there evera Religion which was without the idea of an expiation?
http://www.newmanreader.org/Works/arguments/tamworth/section7.html#note2http://www.newmanreader.org/Works/arguments/tamworth/section7.html#note2http://www.newmanreader.org/Works/arguments/tamworth/section7.html#note3http://www.newmanreader.org/Works/arguments/tamworth/section7.html#note3http://www.newmanreader.org/Works/arguments/tamworth/section7.html#note3http://www.newmanreader.org/Works/arguments/tamworth/section7.html#note2


33/34

Sir Robert Peel tells us, that physical science imparts "pleasureand consolation " on a death-bed. Lord Brougham confines himselfto the "gratifying treat;" but Sir Robert ventures to speak of"consolation." Now, if we are on trial in this life, and if death be

the time when our account is gathered in, is it at all serious orreal to be talking of "consoling" ourselves at such a time {304}with scientific subjects? Are these topics to suggest to us thethought of the Creator or not? If not, are they better than storybooks, to beguile the mind from what lies before it? But, if theyare to speak of Him, can a dying man find rest in the mere notionof his Creator, when he knows Him also so awfully as His MoralGovernor and his Judge? Meditate indeed on the wonders ofNature on a death-bed! Rather stay your hunger with corn grown

in Jupiter, and warm yourself by the Moon.But enough on this most painful portion of Sir Robert's Address.As I am coming to an end, I suppose I ought to sum up in a fewwords what I have been saying. I consider, then, that intrinsicallyexcellent and noble as are scientific pursuits, and worthy of aplace in a liberal education, and fruitful in temporal benefits to thecommunity, still they are not, and cannot be, the instrument of anethical training; that physics do not supply a basis, but onlymaterials for religious sentiment; that knowledge does butoccupy, does not form the mind; that apprehension of the unseenis the only known principle capable of subduing moral evil,educating the multitude, and organizing society; and that,whereas man is born for action, action flows not from inferences,but from impressions, not from reasonings, but from Faith.

That Sir Robert would deny these propositions I am far fromcontending; I do not even contend that he has asserted thecontrary at Tamworth. It matters little to me whether he spokeboldly and intelligibly, as the newspapers represent, or guardedhis strong sayings with the contradictory matter with which theyare intercalated in his own report. In either case the drift and theeffect of his Address are the same. He has given his respectedname to a sophistical School, and condescended {305} to mimicthe gestures and tones of Lord Brougham. How melancholy is itthat a man of such exemplary life, such cultivated tastes, suchpolitical distinction, such Parliamentary tact, and such variedexperience, should have so little confidence in himself, so littlefaith in his own principles, so little hope of sympathy in others, so


34/34

little heart for a great venture, so little of romantic aspiration, andof firm resolve, and stern dutifulness to the Unseen! How sad thathe who might have had the affections of many, should havethought, in a day like this, that a Statesman's praise lay in

preserving the mean, not in aiming at the high; that to be safewas his first merit, and to kindle enthusiasm his most disgracefulblunder! How pitiable that such a man should not haveunderstood that a body without a soul has no life, and a politicalparty without an idea, no unity!

February , 1841.

John Henry Newman's Tamworth Reading Room presents a unique a distillation of his Anglicanthought on education, faith and reason, and the Church. This work of theology and literature

challenged his contemporaries and continues to challenge its readers today. Newman crafted sevenletters to the editor of The Times of London in February 1841 in response to an address given by aleading British politician, Sir Robert Peel. The letters, witty and woven with theological andphilosophical arguments, contrasted with Peel's view of secular knowledge and institutions as meansto human fulfillment. Although the letters were pithy and written for a general audience, they wereprovocative and insightful. Together they anticipated Newman's later works as a Roman Catholicincluding the Idea of the University and An Essay in Aid of a Grammar of Assent. Themes, ideas, andthe context of the letters have been treated by a variety of scholars with varying degrees of accuracyand ability. This study seeks to clarify the history and interpretations of the Tamworth Reading Room.More importantly, the dissertation tries to connect the letters to Newman's deeper theologicalconcerns. In order to achieve these goals, the aspects of nineteenth century England as well as

biographical portraits of Peel and Newman are narrated. Peel's address is then detailed followed bysummary interpretations of Newman's letters. The legacy of the letters is traced to the end ofNewman's career. This study does not follow along the lines of particular scholarly interpretations ofthe Tamworth Reading Room, e.g., as literature, education, or religious epistemology. Rather, thedissertation complements these prior efforts, but concludes that the Church figures as the original ideaundergirding the letters. For Newman, the Church and the faith she proclaimed created a "ChristianDifference" to Peel's vision. The faith of the Church was flexible and inclusive enough to elevate thetruths found in modern institutions and innovations in knowledge, yet remained distinct in its origin andtelos as the means for human salvation.

Documents

The Tamworth Reading Room [ Integral]